San Diego Public Transit & MTS Bus Accident Lawyer

Government & MTS Accident Claims in San Diego: The 6-Month Rule

Under California Law, the single most important rule for claims against MTS, NCTD, or the City of San Diego is the deadline. Unlike standard injury cases, you do not have two years to file a lawsuit. You generally have only six months to present a formal Government Tort Claim, or your right to compensation may be lost forever.

What Government Entity cases actually look like in San Diego

These cases don’t fail because the injury isn’t real. They fail on procedure. The government entity will reject claims that are even a day late or filed with the wrong agency. My job is to ensure the claim is technically perfect so we can move to the real fight: liability and damages.

While the legal framework of California Law controls the playing field, the Government Claims Act creates a strict 6-month gate you must clear before you can even file a lawsuit. We navigate these procedural minefields using the Morse Injury Law advantage. If the case needs litigation, we take it to specific San Diego Superior Court venues, where the defense is forced to commit to facts through discovery instead of hiding behind internal reports. Because these deadlines are unforgiving, we urge you to review our client resources guide to understand the specific timeline for public entity claims.

• Problem: a rider is injured on an MTS bus or Trolley, and assumes they have 2 years to sue.
• The Trap: the 6-month deadline (Gov. Code 911.2) passes, and the city immunity kicks in.
• Legal strategy: file the formal Government Tort Claim immediately to preserve the right to sue.
• Resolution: once the procedural gate is unlocked, we treat it like a standard negligence claim.

I look at these files the way a city attorney would: is the claim timely, and was it served on the correct clerk? Public entities rely on these technicalities to dismiss valid injuries. They count on you missing the form or the date.

My job is to take that advantage away. We file the claim, track the rejection notice, and then file the lawsuit in Superior Court where the government has to answer like any other defendant.

Why California Law and San Diego Superior Court venue materially change outcomes

Government cases are not “just another injury claim.” California Law grants immunities to public entities that don’t apply to private drivers. In San Diego Superior Court, the difference between a viable case and a dismissed case is often whether the claim was properly presented before the lawsuit was filed.

• Claims handling: the government has 45 days to respond to your claim; if they ignore it, it is deemed rejected by operation of law.
• Leverage: proper claim presentation removes the “sovereign immunity” defense.
• Litigation consequences: missed prerequisites can bar the lawsuit entirely, regardless of injury severity.

The “Immediate 5” questions San Diego riders ask after a Government/MTS accident

Do I have different deadlines if my accident involved a public transit agency in San Diego?

Yes. If the responsible party is a public entity (MTS, NCTD, City of San Diego), California Government Code section 911.2 generally requires a claim to be presented within six months. This is a hard deadline.

What happens if I miss the 6-month deadline?

If you miss the deadline, you may be able to file an application for “leave to present a late claim” within one year of the accident, but this is discretionary and difficult to win. If that year passes, the claim is usually barred forever.

What legal duty applies to government transit operators?

Under California Civil Code section 2100, MTS and public carriers still owe the “highest duty of care” to passengers. Government immunity does not excuse negligent operation of a vehicle.

What evidence actually moves value in a Government injury claim?

Video retention is critical. MTS buses and trolleys overwrite footage quickly. We send preservation letters immediately to stop the destruction of the only objective evidence of the crash.

Can I sue the bus driver personally?

Generally, you sue the public entity (MTS/City) who is vicariously liable for the driver’s actions. Suing the driver individually still requires compliance with the Government Claims Act.

Government defendants don’t fear anger. They fear a clean file—timely claim presentation, preserved evidence, and a record that reads the same way in a demand, a deposition, and a courtroom.

How magnitude is evaluated in San Diego Government/MTS claims

Evidence Evaluation in San Diego Cases

• Police reports vs medical records: police involvement is inconsistent in transit incidents; medical records usually carry the timeline, mechanism, and symptom progression.
• Scene photos vs repair documentation: scene photos matter here—platform gaps, wet surfaces, curb edges, signage, and the exact stop location; repair documentation may matter when a door, step, or restraint system is involved.
• Treatment timeline consistency: delays give the defense room to argue an unrelated cause; consistent documentation tightens causation.
• Tie to San Diego claims handling: agencies rely on internal reporting and retention policies; early identification of route/vehicle details helps preserve what would otherwise disappear.

Settlement vs Litigation Reality

Once a case is filed in San Diego Superior Court, the defense has to operate under discovery rules instead of internal discretion. That changes leverage, but only if the prerequisites were satisfied and the evidence was preserved early enough to matter.

• Discovery obligations: video retention, maintenance logs, operator training materials, and incident records become discoverable issues instead of “internal documents.”
• Leverage: timely claim presentation and a provable mechanism increase the cost of denial.
• Risk: public entity defenses often aim at procedure first; if procedure fails, the case can end before damages are discussed.

San Diego-Specific Claim Wrinkles

• Traffic density and rear-end patterns: buses in dense corridors face sudden stops that create standing-passenger injuries, and the defense often tries to label those events as “normal operation” instead of preventable movement.
• Multi-vehicle freeway collisions: transit vehicles do get pulled into chain-reaction crashes on I-5, I-8, and I-15, and the hard part is identifying the right defendants and coverage layers when a bus passenger is injured but multiple drivers share fault.
• Common Southern California insurer resistance patterns: “you weren’t holding on,” “it was ordinary movement,” “the report shows no injury,” and “the video is unavailable” are predictable defenses unless the record is locked early.

Lived Experiences

Benjamin

The incident report made it sound like nothing happened, and I felt like I was being dismissed from day one. Once my attorney fixed the timeline and pushed for the right records, the resolution reflected the real impact on my work and treatment.

Morgan

I didn’t realize there were special claim rules for transit cases, and I was close to missing a deadline. After my attorney treated it like a San Diego Superior Court file from the beginning, the defense stopped hiding behind paperwork and the outcome matched the evidence.

California Statutory Framework & Legal Authority

These are the exact statutes cited on this page, linked to the official LegInfo source, with a plain-English explanation of what each governs and why it matters in a San Diego personal injury claim.